"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. John C. Gastelum	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Orange County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 4.7 - 21 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 3 rating(s)	Please send me alerts on this judge E-mail Address:

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address ()

Confirm E-mail Address

Zip

Occupation

Add a comment only

Only items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating.

General Rating Criteria

* Temperament		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Scholarship		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Industriousness		(1=Not at all industrious,10=Highly industrious)
* Ability to Handle Complex Litigation		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Punctuality		(1=Chronically Late,10=Always on Time)
* General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
* General Ability as a Trial Judge		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
Flexibility In Scheduling		(1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)

Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation		(1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
General Inclination Regarding Bail		(1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Plea Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation		(1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Involvement in Settlement Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)
General Inclination		(1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)

Comments

Please type what you see below:

What others have said about Hon. John C. Gastelum

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA53390
Rating:3.0

Comments:
Sustained a demurrer against my complaint which laid out a valid cause of action. The case is now in the Court of Appeal

Litigant

Comment #: CA46988
Rating:1.0

Comments:
One of the comments states that the wife is a well respected atty. in Orange County. LOL. Apparently she has hidden her past real good. Quite a scary and sadistic person. Judge must be a prisoner of the marriage. Seems like a decent person the judge. Boy did he make a big mistake in marrying that F-pig

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA45179
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Very poor quality judge. Slow to rule on motions. Many decisions appear only to have been written by overworked and poorly educated research attorneys on court staff.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA41757
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I would 170.6 this judge immediately. He bends the law to suit his decisions. I've read many of his rulings and its clear he either has no grasp of the law, is lazy, or extremely biased. Unfortunately, I don't think Orange County has any good judges anymore.

Other

Comment #: CA37186
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
37172

...Why not mention, ugly, crooked, over-compensating, abusive, POS, LASC family lawyer. "This certainly reflects on the creepy, LASC lawyer's judge wife ...."and other acomplices.

...But wait, the female judge is just as bad as attorney bed buddy), and appears to engage in serious impropriety, to help equally crooked, LASC attorney bed buddy).

..."Why wouls would choose to share their abode and lawlessness, with such equal POS, and this **DOES reflect on [each of them-] the LASC family law judge and lawyer.

....The LASC dirty, family law judge, is actually judging cases and known for unlawful, back room influences, to unlawfully help attorney she is in bed with.......

.... "Do these conflicted, crooked LASC family law judges, really have the capacity to use back room influences, to help equally crooked lawyer bed buddies?" The answer is Yes, that is exactly what they have been unlawfully doing...

-- Certain crooked LASC family judges and the lawyers who they are in bed with, just like the creepy, stalker LASC family lawyer troll...are dangerous ...while LASC abusive family lawyer trolltroll threatens and makes personal attacks and threats on this site against vulnerable opponents, who have posted the truth...and has also posted and made personal attacks on other judges, females...in order to pathetically attempt, to deflect from his wrongdoings and the wrongdoings of the LASC judge he is in bed with...while his MO and the MO of their cabal is all over this forum and seem to have too much, insider and personal information and attack too many judges and attorney's...with yet, another personal attack, against this judge's wife....which appears to lamely try to deflect from their own reprobate conduct and the truthful comments posted-on them and their orbit.

Other

Comment #: CA37174
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
CA37172

^ Takes one to know one.

--You are likely, an ugly, lying, smelly old fart, disgruntled, abusive, dirty attorney and just as dangerous as Los Angeles family law troll lawyer, who is in bed with certain corrupt , dirty, ugly judges. --

-You know too many personal things on judges from various counties and you always write offensive, personal comments and attacks, against vulnerable opponents, and judges, in order to distract from comments and project from comments, push down comments, of ugly, mean, disgusting judge you are in bed with and lawless harmful conduct you have perpetrated, together.

--You must be a failed, dirty insider attorney, in bed with certain failed,ugly dirty judges, just like the LA family lawyer troll, because you know too much personal information , about judges and litigant's who post truthful comments, on a certain cabal Of LASC family law judges-and you always use same offensive style, to post on the same judges, like this one, whole always bringing up his wife.

---Don't get me started on certain dirty, ugly, abusive, crooked, corrupt family law judge spouses, married to dirty , corrupt lawyers, while they work unlawfully in concert, to harm opponent of the attorney.

---Just like the LA family law troll, you are a very abusive, offensive person, and wonder what you do to your wife behind closed doors, in addition to be a loser and embarrassment.

---Now spouses who are judges, who unlawfully help their attorney spouse, while working in concert, are fair game for truthful comments about their nefarious act, just like some LASC crooked couples.

---Your personal attack about this judge's wife, says more about you, than any comment on this judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA36543
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I am not necessarily a fan of this judge, but that is based on courtroom procedure, canceling hearings with no notice or short notice, and continuing hearings for in pro pers infinitum. His wife is irrelevant to the beneficial purpose of the site. If you have something useful to add to the information posted, please do so. I am sure many would appreciate it if you would refrain from irrelevant comments. They reflect more on the poster - you, than they do on the judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA33902
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Smart, fair, and great temperament. Great with a jury and allows the civil lawyers in his courtroom to present their case. Believer in the jury systems and one hell of a softball player. Consider yourself lucky if assigned to him.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA33867
Rating:8.9

Comments:
He is really quite a good judge. He is patient and listens to both sides and appears to have read the papers. We did not 170.6 him because our research found that he was given Trial Judge of the Year awards by a number of different legal groups. He has an odd sense of humor which may be offputting for some but overall is an excellent judge. His wife is a civil litigator who is well respected in OC. Looks like she beat a bunch of the angry people posting here. Based upon the sexist comments I assume they are men with fragile egos.

Litigant

Comment #: CA32266
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Commenter #CA322262 sounds constipated. Should consume a pound of prunes to relieve their stupidity.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA32262
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The value in this site is info on the judge for performance in trials and hearings as to cases. I have my complaints there and have posted them. It would be nice if people stayed away from irrelevant insults, comments on wife, etc.

Other

Comment #: CA30308
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
CA30301
How obvious was this comment, to push down other comments--calling judge "strange" and "his weirdo wife who is an atty."?

Lookat timing, when it was written.

So obvious! They do eat their own. They distract, deflect from their own crimes--and write comments
on this judge's page-who was very likley thrown under the bus, by a colleague-who is even more conflicted.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA30301
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This judge is plenty strange along with his weirdo wife who is an atty. Don't know how she make her money but it's questionable. No wonder he hooked up with her. She had the bucks and he was squat poor. Now he has to suffer and look at her uggy face and floppy ass.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA27913
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
To answer the last comment. This judge never practiced as an atty. NEVER. Wow, so what can you expect. He may have clerked but who knows. His entire past is a mystery. He shacked up with his present wife and her career is a mystery too. Just a very odd judge and I would not want him hearing my cases based on his history of never practicing as an atty.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26995
Rating:6.0

Comments:
This Judge can be quite nitpicking and demeaning towards counsel if he is not pleased with the case. Makes frequent unsolicited comments from the bench (I was on a bench trial so maybe he is more reserved in front of a jury). Bottom line, he did not like my clients or their case and he either didn’t like me or took out his frustration on me. I would have hoped for a better judicial temperament from this judge and less clear “telegraphing” of his disdain for my clients case. It appears that he was an appellate court research attorney before appointed to the bench. Unclear if he ever actually tried cases as an attorney.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA23159
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I don't blame this judge for looking at cute lady lawyers. His wife resembles a Mrs. Potato Head. Give the fellow a break. he is only human although not a brainy type at all.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA22738
Rating:1.0

Comments:
The worst judge I have encountered in 35 years of practice. He plays favorites. He is particularly partial to younger, attractive female attorneys as I have seen his wife and she is a beast. Loves handing our sanctions. He is the opposite of fair and impartial. Not a bright light and also is lazy. 170.6 was made for him.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA21369
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge has a mean and ugly fat slob of a wife. That is his biggest problem which makes him a bad judge of character. How can someone judge others when he couldn't choose a good wife. She is a complete unethical piece of shit.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA20048
Rating:2.3

Comments:
Listened to him make bad ruling after bad ruling in recent hearing. Basic concepts were lost. Would 170.6 immediately

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12675
Rating:9.4

Comments:
Never had a trial with this judge, but I have enjoyed appearing before him on several pre-trial motions (I have represented both plaintiffs and defendants in his courtroom). He has a good temperament, lets the parties make their record, and was well prepared. Definitely not worth a 170.6 challenge when you could do so much worse in OC. I have read through the negative reviews and I could not disagree more. Judge Gastelum is one of the good ones and the derogatory comments are just as ignorant as they are unhelpful.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA12541
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This judge is dense. To be frank on the stupid side. Someone needs to do his "mental work" for him. Bottom line, a fake judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12019
Rating:3.4

Comments:
No, the online scheduling hasn't prevented cancellation and continuances of long set hearings - often by tentative ruling late the afternoon before, and never an effort to solicit a convenient continuation date from counsel first. Yes pro pers are favored, but this often results in much more expensive cases that don't benefit the pro per parties in the long run, and do waste court and counsel time, and client money. Regardless of what side I am on, this is a very expensive department because of long lead times, very late hearing cancellations with no concern for efficiency of the matter and limiting cost and damages to the parties from delays and refusal to give a fast and clear decision on the law and facts.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA11522
Rating:2.4

Comments:
Not at all thrilled by this one. He's an automatic 170.6 if you end up in the trial pool and your assigned Department sends the case for trial in his department, 170.6 him. Don't even bother otherwise as you'll hate trying this case in front of him.

If your client is big-business, insurance, bank, or some other interest like that, they will get a good shake out of him. Sometimes he's fair if there's a couple of Joes battling it out. Does do some bending over backwards for pro se litigants which is a redeeming quality.

OC's trial management system is a trailing system so you have to hang around for days waiting for the call. In the old days they made you sit in the cafeteria all day, now they tell you to be an hour or so away and ready to go immediately. OC's court reservation system has put a small end to this judge's cancelling long-set hearings. But ex parte's are often cancelled with a ruling from chambers if you get one.

He's not rude to people, but I do not see him being very even-handed. I've won some and lost some in front of him, but trial and hearings requiring evidence is another issue. Evidence is dicey with him. He'll keep out relevant stuff, and admit hearsay. So you have to paper him in. He hates that but its brought on by his own rulings.

Any significant hearings? You better bring a court reporter.

My experience is run in the opposite direction.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA10940
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He is a dummie. Don't believe he ever practiced as an attorney and fakes it all. Hope he has a good clerk in the back because this fellow is a moron. 170.6.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10535
Rating:3.5

Comments:
Do an immediate 170.6. Ex partes and noticed motions are often cancelled or continued short notice with no hearing. You will rarely know why or be able to have input on if they are continued or when they are rescheduled. You will often not be able to get in front of him at all for months, regardless of what you may file.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10272
Rating:3.0

Comments:
If you end up in his division, 170.6 him. Nuff said.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA9866
Rating:4.3

Comments:
I am not a fan. In pre-trial matters he is OK. But in trial he is awful. Does not understand the rules of evidence at all. For example he continually let in hearsay evidence under objection because he said the evidence was just to show "what happened next." How is that a hearsay exception? Then he allowed opposing counsel to bring in an "impeachment" witness. Their impeachment witness was someone who simply contradicted my client's version of events. It was an awful experience. I would paper him if you know you might end up in trial in front of him.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7627
Rating:3.9

Comments:
If he knows he's likely to be appealed, he pays closer attention. If he doesn't think it will go up on appeal, he rules whichever way he wants.

Seems to have problems recognizing the finer distinctions in some cases. Missed a huge section in cited precedent which repeatedly invoked the legislature's express intent which also specifically overruled trial court discretion and cases once approving of that.

Also may lean heavily on research staff to rule, rather than him actually ruling on matters.

Rarely ever changes tentatives, even when its pointed out he's wrong with statutory and precedential citations.

On the other hand, he's not an angry judge or a joker on the bench. More like poker faced.

He has great potential for judicial scholarship though I think its wasted at times.

Overall I think the nature of the job may have jaded him rather than his legal skills. Like I said, he has great potential but seems to me it goes wasted.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA7533
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The dude is lazy and dumb. Sorry but he is certainly not marvelous.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7407
Rating:9.8

Comments:
Judge Gastelum is an outstanding jurist. His Court of Appeal days as a research attorney aids him in being an excellent jurist. I have not seen him step beyond the law. Although I did not prevail in his Courtroom, I would welcome the opportunity to be in front of him, again.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7216
Rating:1.3

Comments:
Lazy. Rarely changes tentative ruling. Paper this judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5951
Rating:1.3

Comments:
You have to reserve a hearing date months in advance to get on long motion calendar. The only way around that is to notice an ex parte application to set it sooner.

He often cancels ex parte's and in highly contested matters, either takes under submission without argument, or palms your case off to another SC judge.

Maybe he's better suited to the appellate bench where he doesn't have to hear argument or take evidence. I don't know. Its hard to gauge him because so far all I have gotten is pro tems and substitute judges. Might as well 170.6 this chap before he gets to first base on your case.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4616
Rating:9.7

Comments:
A review of this judge's work product from 2013 reveals that he is an extraordinarily industrious and precise legal jurist, while simultaneously writing with a creative flair that is a pleasure to read.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4271
Rating:4.5

Comments:
Not a scholarly judge, and he plays favorites.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4207
Rating:2.6

Comments:
I found Judge Gastelum to be incapable of understanding basic concepts like statutes of limitations and judicial admissions. He seems to be a decent fellow, but he would be more suited to small claims court than the civil unlimited panel.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2601
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Painfully slow to rule on submitted matters....

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2505
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Well prepared, seems to read everything and has an agreeable demeanor. Issues detailed and thoughtful tentative rulings on l/m but will still hear you out.